LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                                   Austin, Texas
         
                                   FISCAL NOTE
                               75th Regular Session
         
                                  May 30, 1997
         
         
      TO: Honorable Bob Bullock            IN RE:  Senate Bill No. 1539, As Passed 2nd House
          Lieutenant Governor                West
          Senate
          Austin, Texas
         
         
         
         
         FROM:  John Keel, Director    
         
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on SB1539 ( Relating 
to the regulation of certain facilities, homes, and agencies 
that provide child care and of child-care administrators; providing 
penalties.) this office has detemined the following:
         
         Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by SB1539-As Passed 2nd House
         
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a net 
positive impact of $1,056,302 to General Revenue Related Funds 
through the biennium ending August 31, 1999.
         
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal 
basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions 
of the bill.
         
 
Fiscal Analysis
 
The bill would require the Department of Protective and Regulatory 
Services (PRS) to establish a mandatory listing program for 
small family homes that provide regular child-care for compensation 
in the caretaker's own residence.  It would also require PRS 
to charge each small family home a $20 annual listing fee.

The 
bill would require PRS to conduct background and criminal history 
checks on certain individuals associated with regulated child-care 
facilities and family homes.  The checks would be required at 
application and at least once every 24 months after licensure, 
listing, or registration.  Each check would include a search 
of child abuse and neglect reports maintained by PRS, and a 
search of criminal history record information made available 
by the Department of Public Safety or another criminal justice 
agency.  Child-care providers would be required to pay a background 
and criminal history check fee that does not exceed the department's 
administrative costs.

The effective date for the bill would 
be September 1, 1997.
 
Methodolgy
 
It is assumed that implementation of the provision requiring 
small family homes to list with the department would cause the 
number of regulated family homes to rise by 1,250 in 1998 and 
1,250 in 1999.  It is also assumed that the number of listed 
family homes would remain constant in the year 2000 and beyond. 
 The $20 annual listing fee would result in a gain of $25,000 
in fiscal year 1998 and $50,000 each year thereafter for the 
General Revenue Fund.

PRS reports that it conducted nearly 
48,000 background and criminal history checks on individuals 
associated with regulated child-care facilities and family homes 
in fiscal year 1996.  These checks were conducted at no cost 
to the facility or home.  It is assumed that implementation 
of the provision requiring facilities and homes to pay a background 
and criminal history check fee would generate new revenue with 
no additional costs.

It is assumed that implementation of 
the provision requiring PRS to conduct background and criminal 
history checks at least once every 24 months would increase 
the department's workload by more than 70,000 checks per year. 
 PRS would need additional FTE positions to accommodate the 
new workload.  First year costs and revenues have been reduced 
by 25% to give the department time to adopt rules and phase-in 
the new program.

It is assumed that PRS would charge a fee 
to recover the administrative costs associated with the background 
and criminal history check requirement.  These would include 
staffing costs, a $1 fee for DPS criminal history searches, 
and a $24 fee for FBI fingerprint searches (which would be conducted 
on a very small number of individuals).
The probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions 
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage 
is estimated as follows:
 
Five Year Impact:
 
Fiscal Year Probable           Probable Revenue   Change in Number   
            Savings/(Cost)     Gain/(Loss) from   of State                                                
            from General       General Revenue    Employees from                                          
            Revenue Fund       Fund               FY 1997                                                 
            0001               0001                                                                        
       1998        ($768,628)        $1,284,279              17.2                                    
       1998         (918,892)         1,459,543              22.7                                    
       2000         (887,240)         1,427,891              22.7                                    
       2001         (887,240)         1,427,891              22.7                                    
       2002         (872,368)         1,413,019              22.4                                    
 
 
         Net Impact on General Revenue Related Funds:
 
The probable fiscal implication to General Revenue related funds 
during each of the first five years is estimated as follows:
 
              Fiscal Year      Probable Net Postive/(Negative)
                               General Revenue Related Funds
                                             Funds
               1998             $515,651
               1999              540,651
               2000              540,651
               2001              540,651
               2002              540,651
 
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as 
the provisions of the bill are in effect.
          
No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
          
   Source:            Agencies:   530   Department of Protective and Regulatory Services
                                         
                      LBB Staff:   JK ,BB ,NM